masarati@aero.polimi.it wrote:
>>>> The way I read this, it seems to imply that if acl-bind is not set, the
>>>> identity specified by idassert-bind will be used -- which is clearly
>>>> not
>>>> happening here. Am I misreading this, or do you think the wording
>>>> should
>>>> be changed here?
>>>
>>> As far as I remember, the above is (or was) true in some cases (which I
>>> do
>>> not remember); in any case, the above statement is in contradiction with
>>> Howard's statement. Either the behavior stated above should be
>>> generalized (if desirable, in order to avoid the need to configure
>>> things
>>> twice when the same identity is going to be used), or the two should be
>>> decoupled everywhere in the code.
>>
>> The current code in ldap_back_prepare_conn:
>>
>> >>>>
>> #ifdef HAVE_TLS
>> if ( LDAP_BACK_CONN_ISPRIV( lc ) ) {
>> sb =&li->li_acl;
>>
>> } else if ( LDAP_BACK_CONN_ISIDASSERT( lc ) ) {
>> sb =&li->li_idassert.si_bc;
>>
>> } else {
>> sb =&li->li_tls;
>> }
>>
>> if ( sb->sb_tls_do_init ) {
>> bindconf_tls_set( sb, ld );
>> } else if ( sb->sb_tls_ctx ) {
>> ldap_set_option( ld, LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_CTX, sb->sb_tls_ctx );
>> }
>>
>> /* if required by the bindconf configuration, force TLS */
>> if ( ( sb ==&li->li_acl || sb ==&li->li_idassert.si_bc )&&
>> sb->sb_tls_ctx )
>> {
>> flags |= LDAP_BACK_F_USE_TLS;
>> }
>> <<<<
>>
>> It seems the initial if/else belongs outside the #ifdef, first of all. Not
>> sure how to handle the fallback to li->li_tls.
>
> Uh, no, that's fine: sb is only used to decide whether and how to start
> TLS, as far as I understand, so the #ifdef is fine. li_tls is only about
> configuring TLS for regular connections, which could be different from
> that of li_acl and li_idassert (and in any case one may want to configure
> TLS without configuring li_acl nor li_idassert.
OK. The error I saw before was that TLS was started without the CA cert being
configured, and that's because at this point, li->li_acl was used but only
li->li_idassert had any TLS configuration. I've patched this now to also use
li->li_idassert if li_acl was not configured.
> Later, in ldap_back_getconn(), there's some code that either uses li_acl
> or li_idassert; however, in ldap_back_dobind_int(), private connections
> only use li_acl for private connections when SASL is configured. Probably
> here we should use either li_acl or li_idassert if defined.
Yeah, that sounds right. OK, will look into this.
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/